Best reason to purchase the Leica T

[Lee Martin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you still think Panasonic didn't make your G star compact ?

[Guest badbob]

Do you still think Panasonic didn't make your G star compact ?

 

See my post where it says made in-house.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[tundraline]

You're misrepresenting what I said. I have no problem with you or anyone complaining about the features of a Leica T or lack thereof. But "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck in all probability". What that means is when you post a review on another camera on a Leica T forum, that's a problem. When you have a fairly long post comparing a Leica T to a Fuji and expecting the Leica to be competitive, that's a problem.

 

The Leicas made in-house in Germany aren't in the same performance class as Sonys or Fujis. Comparing them to illustrate a point or two makes sense, but when the post becomes negative on the Leica because "it doesn't match up" to the Fuji or Sony - that does not make sense. The Leica T way outperforms the M - a camera that costs several times as much. But it doesn't compare to Sony or Fuji, because it's not a competitor, period.

 

I've talked to a thousand people about my Leica cameras, and those who don't already have Leicas just throw up their hands and say "no way" when they hear the price.

 

There are a few people on Leica forums who have M's, allegedly anyway, who are looking for a smaller "second" camera, and they often agonize over buying a Fuji etc. as compared to buying a Leica T or X Vario, or even in past years, a Leica X1. Those posts never go anywhere except to create bad feelings, because the Leicas are never going to compete with the Fujis etc. on features and performance. Unless, like me, you would have a different concept of what's important to you in a small camera.

 

Not sure what you are saying or trying to say, except that it appears that you believe the only thing anyone should discuss in this thread or any other thread in the Leica forum is Leica, and only Leica. That's a new one on me. Anyway, I don't think there's much percentage in continued discussion between us on this point. It's probably boring for everyone else. Enjoy your T -- it's a great camera.

Edited August 18, 2014 by tundraline

[NZDavid]

...The Leica T way outperforms the M - a camera that costs several times as much...

 

I haven't looked at the T forum for ages but this bizarre comment caught my eye. In what way? It seems totally unscientific with no evidence whatsoever.

 

I am sure the T is a fine camera though, as I said elsewhere, not for everyone. I fail to see why it should not be acceptable to compare all and any cameras.

[Guest badbob]

Not sure what you are saying or trying to say, except that it appears that you believe the only thing anyone should discuss in this thread or any other thread in the Leica forum is Leica, and only Leica. That's a new one on me. Anyway, I don't think there's much percentage in continued discussion between us on this point. It's probably boring for everyone else. Enjoy your T -- it's a great camera.

 

Once again, you're misrepresenting what I said, and so I can only assume now that it's deliberate.

 

For the sake of others who read here, I welcome discussion of the T, I welcome comparisons to other cameras for specific features, basically anything that's reasonable for a Leica T discussion subforum. I object to reviews of other cameras posted here, even when they are brief reviews. Posting a link to other camera reviews is OK I suppose if making some point is necessary. But when people start posting lengthy text about all the reasons they rejected the T, I smell a rat. If you rejected the T for whatever reason, feel free to mention it, but please don't make it a "dump on the T" posting, since this is primarily a positive forum for T enthusiasts and other people who are interested in it.

 

I don't think all reviews need to be enthusiastic, or fail to mention weak points in a product. But the T is a good camera, it's far more expensive than "comparable" models from other manufacturers, and that fact alone (much less performance for the dollar) invites a lot of negative criticism. So don't load up the forum with all of that - if you don't like the T for what it really is, leave it alone.

[Guest badbob]

I haven't looked at the T forum for ages but this bizarre comment caught my eye. In what way? It seems totally unscientific with no evidence whatsoever.

 

I am sure the T is a fine camera though, as I said elsewhere, not for everyone. I fail to see why it should not be acceptable to compare all and any cameras.

 

One small example - my MM goes ca-chunk, ca-chunk, ca-chunk (about that fast) when in burst mode, and the T is much faster.

 

The other example is where the T is spectacularly faster - taking photos at 27 mm effective focal length then also at 84 mm FL - the M's require changing lenses. Now feel free to dance around that all you like, but the zoom lens I have with the T gives me far more performance and flexibility than my MM (or any M) camera.

 

Then there's the price, compared to a M with at least 2 lenses.

 

That's bizarre? In what universe?

 

EDIT: Compare any and all cameras? Yes. Post reviews of other cameras here? No. Make the forum a negative experience for T owners and prospective owners? I definitely disagree with that.

Edited August 18, 2014 by badbob

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Exactly, in some areas you may feel the T outperforms the M (quietness, speed of operation, flexibility, zoom lens) but that's your opinion. Other criteria may include simplicity and ergonomics (subjective again, with some preferring real dials over touch-screen or vice versa). An objective comparison would require an analytical and scientific approach concentrating on results. A bald statement that the T outperforms the M is simplistic.

 

I do get rather sick of people trying to dictate what others should be allowed to write or not. As long as they abide by the forum rules, surely other people's opinions are equally valid -- even if they disagree with your own.

[soundsgoodsg]

The other example is where the T is spectacularly faster - taking photos at 27 mm effective focal length then also at 84 mm FL - the M's require changing lenses. Now feel free to dance around that all you like, but the zoom lens I have with the T gives me far more performance and flexibility than my MM (or any M) camera.

 

I may be mistaken, but in comparing performance of a zoom lens to 2 primes makes no sense: the photographic ability of a fast prime easily gives it the upper hand in terms of "performance", but any zoom lens will always, by the laws of physics as related to light and current zoom lens design, necessitate a much slower max aperture.

 

Yes, you can change from one focal length to another quicker on a T, but the actual performance of the optics cannot be that a zoom beats a prime.

 

I have a 50mm Summilux on my T and the optical performance married to the T's quirks (come on, firmware 1.2, deliver fixes that we all want!) and don't see any reason or logic as to how you would compare a T to an M.

[JHAG]

[…]

So sweeping statements can be quite useful.

 

here's one

 

I've tried M lenses on Olympus E-M1, Fuji X-T1, Sony A7, Sony A7r, Sony Nex 7, Sony Nex 6, Leica M and Leica T. and my personal feeling is that they work best on the M, followed by the T (even only if it's convenient to have the lens name in the exif data). The only cameras which posed a serious issue were the Sony A7r, Sony A7 and NEX 7 - all the other cameras did a creditable job with no smeariness (apart from Fuji greens) and very limited colour shifts.

 

. . . . but in the end, I'll use my M lenses on an M, with the exception of longer focal lengths (75-135) where a small sensor makes for a fast telephoto.

 

Exactly my question : I need to send my M in and turnout from Solms repair means I will be film only for several months. I just need a T + adapter to use it with my M lenses (Noctilux, Summilux 35 + 50 + 75, Summicron 50, 21 + 28 Elmarit).

With adapter ring, I guess results should be interesting, isn't it ? Is shallow DOF still attainable with such a sensor ?

Edited August 18, 2014 by JHAG

[Guest badbob]

I may be mistaken, but in comparing performance of a zoom lens to 2 primes makes no sense: the photographic ability of a fast prime....

 

Actually it makes perfect sense. The critics who say the T is too slow are comparing it to Fujis or other $1000 cameras, not to the M, which has no zoom.

 

My point was extremely clear - the T is a great bargain and performer, having a good zoom lens, compared to the more expensive Leicas. But comparing it to Fujis etc. makes no sense, since it obviously wasn't designed or priced to compete with those.

 

You could say that the T wasn't designed or priced to compete with the M's, but the fact that it outperforms them in a simple side-by-side test in acquiring images at different focal lengths is clear enough.

[andybarton]

... snip...

 

the fact that it outperforms them in a simple side-by-side test in acquiring images at different focal lengths is clear enough.

 

That's a very restricted test upon which to assert that the T out-performs an M and only if you are measuring the speed at which the lens can be "changed" from wide to tele.

 

My wife's D-Lux 3 out-performs an M on that basis...

 

It's like saying that a Reliant Robin (maybe they never got to the US, but images will be "out there") out-performs a Ferrari 458 on the basis of how few wheels it has.

[viramati]

That's a very restricted test upon which to assert that the T out-performs an M and only if you are measuring the speed at which the lens can be "changed" from wide to tele.

 

My wife's D-Lux 3 out-performs an M on that basis...

 

It's like saying that a Reliant Robin (maybe they never got to the US, but images will be "out there") out-performs a Ferrari 458 on the basis of how few wheels it has.

 

Reliant Robin a real classic and certainly more fun than the Ferrari for going round corners

Edited August 18, 2014 by viramati

[Guest badbob]

That's a very restricted test upon which to assert that the T out-performs an M and only if you are measuring the speed at which the lens can be "changed" from wide to tele.

 

My wife's D-Lux 3 out-performs an M on that basis...

 

It's like saying that a Reliant Robin (maybe they never got to the US, but images will be "out there") out-performs a Ferrari 458 on the basis of how few wheels it has.

 

There are other perspectives - I have a few images from the MM/Noctilux that outresolve the T/18-56, but more often the T with its additional zoom reach will produce a better image due to less cropping. The points I've been making are that a T looks pretty good in a price/performance comparison to a M, but doesn't look good in a price/perf. comparison to the Fuji, Sony, etc. And so when users go to the negative perspective making the T look like a bad deal, I go to the positive to provide the proper balance.

[leicatraveller]

I really cant see any reason to buy a T instead of sony A6000

worst sensor (old), no EVF, NOT-intuitive interface with such crazy touch screen only option

...i will not talk about price :-)

sorry leica but T its not for me, even if you sell me at the same price of A6000 :-)

[Guest badbob]

I really cant see any reason to buy a T instead of sony A6000

worst sensor (old), no EVF, NOT-intuitive interface with such crazy touch screen only option

...i will not talk about price :-)

sorry leica but T its not for me, even if you sell me at the same price of A6000 :-)

 

Why post an anti-Leica message here where users of the T gather to learn more about it? Why not send your message to Leica instead?

[JHAG]

Pogue is biased or fair ?

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/tiny-new-cameras-with-big-sensors-the-leica-t-vs-85764760379.html

[Lee Martin]

Exactly my question : I need to send my M in and turnout from Solms repair means I will be film only for several months. I just need a T + adapter to use it with my M lenses (Noctilux, Summilux 35 + 50 + 75, Summicron 50, 21 + 28 Elmarit).

With adapter ring, I guess results should be interesting, isn't it ? Is shallow DOF still attainable with such a sensor ?

 

I can't see why it takes and why owners think its acceptable , for a service to take several months ? You've purchased one of the most expensive cameras available but accept almost third world levels of service and support

[JHAG]

I can't see why it takes and why owners think its acceptable , for a service to take several months ? You've purchased one of the most expensive cameras available but accept almost third world levels of service and support

 

Yes, you're right, I will take immediate action : being too usy to buy out Leica repair departement myself, I'll ask Tim Cook to do it.

[Guest badbob]

Pogue is biased or fair ?

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/tiny-new-cameras-with-big-sensors-the-leica-t-vs-85764760379.html

 

A friend of mine who paints (I have about $10k worth of his art) was interested in the Sony, and he saw my Leica and immediately said "no way" to the price. So I encouraged him to buy the Sony - he did, and he asked me to help him set it up.

 

It's a piece of crap compared to the T, but then, most people just don't need a "nice" camera like the T. God forbid you would stick an M with a fixed lens into the hands of one of those Sony users - they'd throw up when they see the price tag and realize how much more primitive it is than the T.

 

Sony is for the masses, Leica is not.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

I totally disagree. The Sonys are in no way crap. They are capable cameras which render results that more than good enough for the customer group they are aimed at.

I decide d that the T was too expensive for the purpose I need it for, I.e. rarely used backup, so I got a used Nex7. There is nothing wrong with it. Value for money I would say. Not everybody is prepared or able to spend Leica money on photographic equipment. That is no reason to diss them, nor the gear aimed at that customer group especially as it is 98% of the total market. Sony has indeed its own huge niche, Leica its small one. So what? We are all part of the masses in many respects. At least, I am.

Edited August 19, 2014 by jaapv